VDH Ultra Subscriber

Mr. Dernburg, since you like to fact check these columns; please do the same with this tweet I posted just a few hours after Kamala Harris addressed the nation at the DNC. One Insulting, Sappy Harris Speech Who would have thought that Harris all this time, over the last three and a half years, was

10. If the current president canceled his reelection bid because he was too debilitated and unpopular, and is now rarely seen or heard, and if the vice president is out of Washington running a campaign in his place, but avoiding all press conferences, interviews, and unscripted addresses, who exactly, if anyone, is running the United

8. Does the new anti-Semitic Democratic Party prefer to risk losing with the radical nonentity WASP Tim Walz as a vice presidential candidate rather than likely win with a popular, successful, and moderate Jewish Josh Shapiro? Facts: Shameless Republicans trolling Democrats about Anti-Semitism is an appalling political tactic. Anti- Semitism had nothing to do with

6. For the next 80 days, has the chameleon-like Kamala Harris now become a temporary MAGA candidate, as she expropriates Trump’s positions from border security to no taxes on tips? Does the media care to ask the new 80-day MAGA Harris why she has renounced many of her once emphatic beliefs? Facts: Both President Biden

5. After the precedents of 2020 and 2024, is the future orthodox protocol for any Democratic nominee now to avoid all interviews and ex tempore speaking, and stick to teleprompted speeches and scripted responses only? Is the fear that a transparent progressive messenger with an overt and honest left-wing message will double down on it

3. Would the media prefer to help her win but lose further credibility themselves by failing to ask why she has disowned her last three decades of leftist agendas, or to reclaim some of their reputations and thereby risk her losing?  Facts: Harris was a prosecutor and Attorney General of California whereby she prosecuted crimes

As for your “fact-checking attachments,” what follows is a systematic reply to your distortions and often incoherence. As readers will see, both your letter and fact-checking illustrate not just your blinkered partisanship and confusion, but a certain childish mean-spiritedness that seeks to silence those with whom you disagree and apparently cannot refute through the force

Two, you know almost nothing of the multifold requirements of a tenured Hoover senior fellow that transcend public commentary. And since you would apparently wish to see me gone from the Hoover Institution, you should learn what fellows are expected to do and how writing a column fits into their job description. (I mention what